Older generation boxers tougher than today's?

100% agree.

 

This is so true . The older fighters weren't making vast amount s of cash like now . They had to keep on fighting for longer for that reason . Also back in the day most boxer's could'nt pick and choose who they faced , they couldn't do a SRL or a Mayweather , they'd have to face which fight s were available at the time.Different eras .

 

Great post, Bert!

"Men" were men back then, too.

 

OK, let's look at this from the usual American perspective! Sure, let's pretend that boxing's popularity has been on the downslide these last several decades - and that today's boxers from all over the world have grown up under better conditions than boxers back in the 20s and 30s.

Also let's say, that people, as a whole, were tougher back in the day. But boxers are not average people. It takes a special kind of courage to step into a ring and exchange punches with an opponent, risking not just to get humiliated and beat up, but also serious injury. Just because you had a tough upbringing, not everybody is prepared to do that. I don't see, why this special mentality should be any different today.

Also, is there any evidence, that the superior toughness back in the day, was reflected in what actually happened in the ring? Did they fight harder? "Their hunger to win was real"... does this mean, that today this hunger isn't real any more? That today's boxers aren't prepared to fight as hard as they were back in the day? What evidence backs up this contention?

 

People are literally not fighting to stay alive and have food, and shelter. This was the case many times for fighters from long ago, before social welfare programs made that no longer necessary. This is something that is lost and that is a good thing for the world, but makes for weaker boxers despite the nutrition and training advances..

Do not mistake the difference survival makes in a fighters make-up, courage, and heart.

I mentioned earlier that Gatti and Ward had the do or die attitude the past greats had, but they were the exception and not the rule. Other examples of greats that came up in utter poverty is Duran, Dempsey, Liston. It is no coincidence that once they gained fortune they became more mundane and average. This is why their performances varied wildly later in their careers. They still had the skill, but could rarely get up to that "level" again as they did not " Have" to.

The greats from the past were forces of primal nature, and barbarity. That is a hunger based on fight or flight mentality. There is a BIG difference in mindset. You simply rarely see that anymore. The will to win today is based mostly on monetary gain, and recognition. They can be powerful motivators, but I can tell you whom I would rather get in the ring with.

 

Maybe not in soft first world countries but I would argue this still applies to many fighters from SE Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and pockets of inner city US.

 

Did you watch Taylor-Persoon last Saturday? Could two boxers possibly have tried harder to win than what we saw there? If this had not been two women, on the undercard to a much bigger fight, but instead Canelo and GGG duking it out like that… we would now be talking Fight of The Year! Being from Ireland and Belgium, respectively, I doubt either of them have ever gone to bed hungry... wondering where the next meal would come from.

And that's not the only example from modern boxing, where boxers fought like their lives depended on it. Remember the first Whyte-Chisora match, where they slugged each other to the brink of collapse? Would they have been able to fight even harder, if the fight had taken place 80 years ago? I don't see, how that would be possible.

And who can forget fights like Vitali-Briggs and Jones-Lebedev… where the losers showed heart and courage above and beyond the call of duty. You don't have to be a struggling pre-WW2 boxer to give 100%.

 

Yeah watch Round 9 and tell me about how they aren’t as tough as in the olden days.

 

And don't forget that a lot of old-timers fought a couple/few/ many times a month for their pay. If it wasn't going well one night, no reason to risk you next pay day in a few days. How many fight reports do we see from early in the 20th century where the ref is prodding the participants for action or where both fighters have made a silent agreement?

 

Not only could the ref urge the participants to make a real effort - many times he actually threw both boxers out, because the scam was too obvious. Such fights are listed on BoxRec as a "NC"... though they in fact were double disqualifications. There are lots of these fights, back when a 100+ fight career was the norm rather than the exception. Even top boxers of the day some times took part in these staged "fights"... only to be found out, when the acting was too bad.

 

Two countries who around half a century ago were similar economically and number of
of World Champs were Korean and Japan as they both were rebuilding post War.
Today both have become economic forces but Japan has continued to produce World
Champs but Korean is no longer producing World Champs. The reason for this is hard
to put down as both put a high value on education both its seems for some reason
in Japan fighting is seen as more viable career path.

 

Tougher times make tougher men...fighting often...lousy money...no Gold Medals" to fall back on...working at your craft...paying your dues...most of this is unheard of today. Imagine some big name "fighters' today living in hobo and mining camps fighting to stay alive or fighting so they can eat?

 

What a terrible time that must have been! I hate to think how many boxers, who had the potential to develop into ATGs, were simply lost to these harsh conditions.

 

What is the usual American perspective?

 

You know… that boxing has been on the downslide for decades, because that's the case in the US. And completely ignoring that this is not true for the world as a whole.